LD-84-064, Responds to 841022 Request for Description of Measures Undertaken to Address Apparent Inconsistencies Between Palo Verde Tech Specs & CESSAR-F.Slides from 841004 Meeting, Discussing Verified & Possible Inconsistencies,Encl
| ML20107M564 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000470 |
| Issue date: | 11/06/1984 |
| From: | Scherer A ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| LD-84-064, LD-84-64, NUDOCS 8411140196 | |
| Download: ML20107M564 (29) | |
Text
s n
C-E Power C ystems Tel 203/688-1911 f
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Telex: 99297 1000 Prospect Hill Road
)
Windsor Connecticut 06095 POWER M SYSTEMS STN 50-470F November 6, 1984 LD-84-064 Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
CESSAR Inconsistencies
References:
(A)
NRC Letter, C. O. Thomas to A. E. Scherer, dated October 22, 1984 (B) C-E Letter LD-84-061, A. E. Scherer to D. G. Eisenhut, dated October 22, 1984
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
Reference (A) requested a description of the measures C-E was undertaking to address apparent inconsistencies noted between the Palo Verde Technical Specifications and CESSAR-F. Additionally, C-E's actions to verify design control adequacy were requested with a schedule for submittal of requested design changes.
In response to these requests, the following information is provided.
At a meeting with the NRC Staff on October 4,1984, C-E presented a discussion of verified and possible inconsistencies between the Palo Verde Technical Specifications and CESSAR-F. Attached is a copy of the slides used in that meeting. These provide a summary of how the specific inconsistencies occurred.
Specifically, these inconsistencies dealt with response times which appeared in the Technical Specifications being nonconservative with respect to those used in the Safety Analyses. These problems were discovered in a Technical Specification review effort by C-E which began in August 1984 and is currently in its completion stages. While several inconsistencies were noted, none constituted significant safety hazards and, indeed, most were overwhelmed by conservatisms used in the various analyses. To eliminate these inconsistencies, however, the following actions are in progress.
(1) C-E is revising the CESSAR interface requirements for MSIV and MFIV closure time to ensure consistency with safety analysis assumptions.
(2) C-E is revising the CESSAR Chapter 15 Sequence of Events tables and supporting text to avoid the appearance of any inconsistency with Technical Specifications and interface requirements.
841114o196 841106
/M8 PDR ADOCK 05000470 m
A PDR
Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut LD-84-064 November 6, 1984 Page 2 An additional inconsistency between a CESSAR interface requirement on Emergency Feedwater System response time and the safety analyses assumptions was identified to the Staff by a telephone call just after the October 4,1984 meeting. The related Technical Specification, however, was correct. The inconsistency will be corrected in C-E's quality assurance files for the safety analyses, but will not require any changes to CESSAR-F.
These revisions are currently expected to be submitted on the CESSAR docket on or about November 16, 1984. As was also mentioned at the October 4,1984 meeting, some other minor CESSAR-F corrections are resulting from the Technical Specification review effort [some of which have already been submitted under Reference (B)]. Additionally, an updating of CESSAR resulting from the normal revision process is being prepared. These changes are expected to be submitted on or about November 16, 1984.
Independent of the Palo Verde Technical Specification verification effort and in order to reinforce C-E's management confidence in our design control program, C-E is conducting an independent audit of the process used to generate the CESSAR/Palo Verde Technical Specifications. This audit is being performed by C-E's Systems Engineering Department using senior engineers who were not involved in performing the CESSAR or Palo Verde specific safety analyses they are to audit. This audit will independently assure that the FSAR analyses are consistent with C-E design specifications, interface requirements, Technical Specifications and reasonable engineering judgement. The results of this audit will be discussed with the NRC Staff upon completion of that program (which is expected during November). We will, of course, imediately inform the Staff of any significant finding.
If you have any further questions or coments on this issue, please contact me or Mr. G. A. Davis of my staff at (203) 285-5207.
Very truly yours, COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
M A. E.'Sc5erer~
Director Nuclear Licensing AES:las cc: K. Eccleston (NRC Project Manager)
I i
4 l
AGEllDA INTRODUCTION 1
C-E TECli SPEC VERIFICATION PROGRAM RSB QUESTION #6 REMAltlI!!G CONCERN RESP 0!lSE TIMES RECEilT CllANGES DUE TO STARTUP TESTING 4
ACTION PLAil i
C0ilCLUSI0tlS o
k t
)
l i
o h
-r
..w.,y-,-r-..,
,7-,,-,-w~,
w
..-y,--,-v-r'---
- r*
w'vm 1e rv='
-'< v*v-
- w w-y - r '- w a
'---re----*'t,v'*vw
-v+<w+-=
g 4 -=
4 4.
4 m
--._s 4-_m_.
J u e
4 m._.
4-x_.
u A
h 4
'l i
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION I-5 t
6
= vv -a w - - - - - - - -- n 1-
--e-y m...e
-,*y..--
,+---,+,-,----ev--6er
--e v ~ m ' m--1 r vy - w-w we
+T'r m---e--*v-+---
m-9-?--w-n-
r-et+--'-
'0 TASK CE ENGINEERING TO VERIFY CONSISTENCY AND TECHNICAL ACCURACY BETWEEN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS, PVNGS FSAR AND SER, AND CESSAR FSAR AND SER 9
6 0
9 PRODUCTS 1.
VERIFICATION LETTER TO APS (PVNGS) 2.
LIST OF RECOMMENDED PVNGS FSAR AND SER CHANGES TO APS 3.
VERIFICATION LETTER TO NRC (CESSAR) 4.
LIST OF RECOMMENDED CESSAR FSAR AND SER CHANGES TO NRC 1
1
=
t l-
CURREllT s
BASIS l.
PROOF & REVIEW TECH SPECS 2.
PVNGS FSAR THROUGH AMENDMENT 13 3.
PVNGS SER THROUGH SUPPLEMENT 5 4.
CESSAR FSAR THROUGH AMENDMENT 9 5.
CESSAR SER THROUGH SUPPLEMENT 2 6.
PROOF & REVIEW AGREED CHANGES i
I I
i l'
t I
l l
I i
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CROSS REFERENCE PVNGS TECH SPEC NUMBER CESSAR TECH SPEC NUMBER TITLE PVNGS FSAR SECTION (S)
PRIMARY REVIEWER l
SECONDARY REVIEWER (S) l
CHRON0 LOGY DISCUSSION LATE SPRING P
MEETING JUNE START REVIEW 8/2 PROOF & REVIEW ISSUED 8/14 CEENGINEERINGCOMMENTSR5CEIVED 8/31 PHASE 1 APS/BECHTEL/CE REVIEW MEETING 9/6, 7 & 8 APS COMMENTS TO PROOF & REVIEW 9/14 CE ENGINEERING. REVIEW START 9/17 PHAS$2 DRAFT RSB QUESTIONS (20) 9/18 l
FIRST RSB MEETING 9/20 0
DRAFT RSB RESPONSES 9/25 SECOND RSB MEETING 9/27 a 28 i
t
CURRENT STATUS VERIFICATION ISSUED OVER 400 PACKAGES COMMEilTS RECEIVED COMMENT RESOLUTION It! PROCESS
!!EEKLY MEETI!1GS TO RESOLVE IIRC BRAtlCll GUESTI0tlS C!!ANGE PACKAGES TO BE ISSUED OVER NEXT THREE llEEKS a
e e
d
RSB QUESTIONS (20)
~
114 RESOLVED - APPLICAtlT TO SUBMIT LETTEP RESP 0.'lSE 5 EXPECTED TO BE RESOLVED Tills WEEK 1 QUESTION #6 REMAlfilflG C0ilCERflS RESP 0llSE TIMES CPC VARI ABLE OVERPO!!ER MSIV MFIV R E C Ell T Cll A f1 G E S MFIV AUXILIARY FEEDWATER FLOW START TINE LOCK 0UT I
- -,-~,
v.. m e - r
-, -, ----..,,.m
,,,,,,nvn,-n----nen,...
.,-e.,...
- -,--~pr-,
n.w.,--c~,,,-y-g e.---s-
-w,,w
,4g
..e,--
.n-
i TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION RESPONSE TIME e
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FSAR AtlD TECH SPEC VALUE OF RESPONSE TIMES FOR:
o CPC'S o
VARIABLE OVERPOWER TRIP (V0PT) o MSIV o
f1FIV e
fi0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON EVE!!T CONSE0l!E!!CES I
1 ACTIONS TAKEtl e
RESOLVED DIFFEREllCES BET!IEEN VALUES Ill FSAR AilD IN TECH SPECS a
e REVIE!IED DOCUMENTATI0fl PROCESS USED TO DERIVE
' VALUES USED I-i t
I
3 o
DESCRIBE DIFFEREllCES o
TRACE REAS0!!S o
PRESEllT RESOLUTI0il
- CPCs
- V0PT
- MSIV/f1FIV t
a
1 CPC RESP 0ilSE TIME DIFFERE lCES DilE TO C!!AtiGE Ifl RESPONSE TIME e
TEST PROCEDL'RES ADDITI0tlAL DIFFEREflCE FOR T'!0 VALl!ES Dl!E TO e
RESOLUTION OF EQUIPfiENT PERFORf1ANCE VERIFIED TEC!! SPEC VALUES AGREE !!IT!! FSAR e
VALUES t
g-CPC RESPD.SE TIME 4
1/84 CPC SETPOINTS AND RESP 0!lSE TIMES USED Ill FSAR 2/84 11/83 8/84
,7 DEVELOPMENT L~
CPC DETERit! NATION OF RESPONSE Tit 1E MEASUREMENT Lil11 TING FSAR 4__
TEST ACCEPTANCE CHANNEL ANALYSIS RESPONSE CRITERIA STUDY TIMES 10/84
, 7/84 y
TECH SPEC f1ARKED UP VALUES PROOF AND REVIEW TECH SPECS USED:
USED:
RESPONSE TIME SAFETY ANALYSIS TESTIf1G ACCEPTANCE RESPONSE tit'ES CRITERIA
T f
6 g
j i,
i 1-CPC RESP 0flSE TIMES FUNCTIONAL UNIT 7/3/84.
10/1/84 (Seconds)
(Seconds) t A.
PROCESS 1.
Local Power Density i High
- a. Neutron Flux Powerifrom Excores 0.61 0.75
- b. CEA Positions 0.22 1.35
- c. CEA positions: CEAC Penalty Factor 0.41 0.75
-t 2.
DNBR - Low i
a._ Neutron Flux Power from Excores 0.61 0.75'
- b. CEA positions' O.22 1.35
-c.
Cold Leg Temperature 0.81 0.75
'd. Hot Leg Temperature 0.81
'0.75
- e. Primary Coolant Pump Shaf t Speed 0.52 0.75
- f. -Reactor Coolant Pressure from Press 0.48 0.75
- g. CEA Positions: CEAC Penalty Factor 0.41 0.75 g.
s 1
\\
,y
? Js
'g t
UJ t
w i
'N
- )
y CPC RESPONSE TIME e
DIFFERE; ICES DUE TO' Cl!AtlGE Ifl RESPONSE TIME TEST PROCEDURES e
ADDITI0flAL DIFFERENCE FOR TWO VALUES DUE TO RESOLUTION OF EQUIPf1ENT PERFORf1ANCE o
VERIFIED TEC!! SPEC VALUES AGREE WITH FSAR VALUES e
il0 FURTilER ACTI0fl PEQUIRED t
T.
m..
g:
4 T
1 4
m -
1 e
e 4-4 1
1 n
d o
BEFORE DETAILS ON V0PT & f1SIV/MFIV t
-DEFINITION OF RESPONSE TIMES--
-GENERAL PROCESS FOR GEilEPATION OF RESP 0l!SE TIMES r
k
+
+
s I
i 4
i i
c I-Y a
t I
i V0PT AND fiSIV/MFIV RESPONSE TIME RPS (V0PT)
RESP 0ilSE TIME SEtlSOR SIGIIAL ACTl'ATI0ii
, RESP 0ilSE
, DELAY TIME m
SR SD 4
s ESF (MSIV/MFIV)
RESP 0ilSE TIME 1
I
~
/O.
PROCESS FOR INCORPORATING PPS DATA INTOSAFETY ANALYSIS SAFETY SAFETY ANALYSIS ANALYSIS REQUESTS I
OCONT I&CE FOR CO,it CESSAR FSAR 1
FOR.85 DATA
~
SAFETY A,tALYSIS r,.en sm
- sir, PROCESS FOR ESTADLISillNG PPS TECH SPECS SAFETY ANALY$l$
REQUEST FOR
.P5 DATA
_.9s
.., 0A,A -
,, mssA..,
ms,A.,
p
84 iusi t
ll s
V0PT RESP 0f!SE TIME e
DIFFEREllCES DUE TO ERROR Ifl REPORTIflG OF VALVE USED Iil FSAR A1ALYSIS FOR EX-CORE f1EUTR0!l DETECTOR RESP 0i!SE TIME t
~
A.
V0PT PROCESS FOR ll:CORPORATitG PPS DATA INTO SAFETY AN!1YSIS SAFETY
$ATETV ArtALYSIS ANALYSl$
SR
- 001 SR. o.003 50
.55 50 = 0.55 PPS DATA OCONT EWESTS
=[l&CE FOR CONT CESSAR FSAR FOR PPS DATA 1
~
SAFETY AtlALYSIS 79-81 6/77 5/13 PROCESS FOR ESTABLISHlf!G PPS TEOl SPECS SAFETY ANALYSl5
+
SR
- 0.6 SR = 0.6 SD
- 0.55 50
! ACE INPUT ISCE DOCUMENT IN CESSAR-F CESSAR-F "g
12/81 9/82 I
r
-.... ~.
~ _ _ -
j)
V0PT RESP 0tlSE TIME s
DIFFERENCES DUE TO ERROR Ifl REPORTING OF VALVE
.USED Ill FSAR ANALYSIS FOR EX-CORE NEUTRON DETECTOR RESP 0llSE TIME e
!1EED TO REVISE TECH SPEC VALUE e
NO CHANGE It! FSAR ANALYSES t
/9 f1SIV RESP 0flSE TIME e
DIFFEREilCES DUE TO EPR0R I!! REPORTIf!G OF DATA USED I!! FSAR Af1ALYSIS FOR MSIV SIGI1AL DELAY I
l
/f 1
tiSIV / t'FIV PROCESS FOR llCORPORATII:G PPS PATA !!TO SAFETY AftALYSIC INTERFACE
~
5 SEC VALVE SAFETY SAFETT
RESPONSE
A3ALYS1$
Cont:
SR 8 50 = 0.9 ANALYSIS
!":U ll:M g aa-'o
--+
p p,
SAFETY ANALYS!$
79 81 6/11
$f73 l
PROCESS FOR ESTA3LISillt!G PPS TE01 SPECS CONT: $R y 0.9 SR & $0 1,3 SAFEff ANALYS!$
non.LOCA* SR = 0.6 SR & 50 1.15 (SR & 501ggn= 1.15 50 = 0.55 LM PPS DATA REQUEST FOR PP$
TECH SPEC USED IN
\\
PPS DATA USEO CONT
- 00 & ENT thPUT l&CC CESSAAd
_j Irl CESSAR-F si"
,i,,
men S
9
jL f1SIV RESP 0f1SE TIME e
DIFFEREflCES DUE TO ERROR Ill REPORTIflG OF DATA USED Ill FSAR A!!ALYSIS FOR MSIV SIGflAL DELAY e
f1EED TO REVISE TECH SPEC VALUES OF MSIV RESP 0f1SE TIME AND IflTERFACE. REQUIREME!1TS 0!! MSIV CLOSURE TIME o
fl0 CHAtlGE f EEDED I!! FSAR AllALYSIS
47 i1FIV RESPollSE TIME o
ISSUE AtlD RESOLUTION SAME AS THAT FOR MSiv o
ADDITI0t!AL ISSUE TO BE COVERED UilDER RECEf!T CilANGES t
o o
CONCLUSIONS e
EXCEPT AS NOTED IN THIS MEETING, ALL RESPONSE TIMES USED IN CESSAR/PVNGS SAFETY ANALYSES WERE REVIEWED AND FOUND TO CONSERVATIVELY B0UND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS e
INCONSISTENCIES UNC0VERED BY THE TECH SPEC VERIFICATION PROGRAM DO NOT INVOLVE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY HAZARDS AND ARE MINOR, ISOLATED CASES e
ALL IDENTIFIED CASES WILL BE CORRECTED (BY REVISING THE APPLICABLE TECHNICAL SPMfFICATIONS TO MATCH ANALYSES ASSUMPTIONS) AND SUBMITTED TO THE STAFF t
I